ruby_select port

[kimura wataru]

Hi all,

I agree we need "ruby_select".
If you allow the following plan, I'll work for this.

step1 (introduce ruby_select)
  * add port:ruby_select
  * add suffix to port:ruby (1.8.7) and port:ruby186 (1.8.6)
  * remove the variant "nosuffix" from port:ruby19

step2 (deprecate port:ruby and add port:ruby18)
  * rename port:ruby to port:ruby187
  * add port:ruby18, as a meta port for 187 and 186 like port:perl5
  * rewrite dependencies port:ruby in all Portfiles to port:ruby18

On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 15:49:51 -0400, David Baumgold wrote:
> I wrote and currently maintain most of the Ruby 1.9 Gem ports currently in
> MacPorts (rb19-*). Recently, Joe Rozner emailed me informing me that my
> rb19-rails port didn't work properly: after a bit of debugging, I discovered
> that he was using the "ruby" executable to run it from the "ruby" port (Ruby
> version 1.8), rather than the "ruby1.9" executable from the "ruby19" port
> (Ruby version 1.9). With the Python ports, users can select default versions
> using the "python_select" port -- it would make a lot of sense to do the
> same thing for Ruby using a "ruby_select" port, but sadly, that port doesn't
> currently exist. There is a +nosuffix variant for the current "ruby19" port,
> but this is not a good solution -- not only does it conflict with the "ruby"
> port, but apparently some rb19-* Portfiles don't work with it (see
> http://trac.macports.org/ticket/25896).
> 
> I noticed that there is a "select" Portgroup which should make this Portfile
> easy enough to write: I've attached a draft Portfile which is more-or-less
> copied from the current python_select port. However, I don't really know
> what I'm doing, and I'm guessing that the "ruby" and "ruby19" ports are
> going to have to be modified for this to work -- and I don't maintain either
> of them. Can someone(s) point me in the right direction and/or help me get
> the ball rolling for this?
-- 
kimura wataru